While some people believe that the complete ban on smoking at the public places is justified, others argue that it is not. This essay totally agrees with the statement that, this law is justified as it saves other visitors of the public places from the passive smoking and also forces smokers to quit smoking for at least that period of time.
Firstly, These people are not only causing harm to their own lungs, but are also harming others by passive smoking. In other words, it is scientifically proven that when a person stays in an area, where smoking is done its smoke penetrates into the lungs of surrounding people via inhalation and unknowingly they are also affected by the detrimental effects of smoking. For example, a study conducted at the Stanford university found that, the lungs of the friends of the chain smokers were 10 percent more damaged than that of the actual smokers. As a result, the Council has taken this decision, so that this will keep safe others who are not actually smoking.
Secondly, it Helps smokers to quit smoking. That is to say, these people generally have a notion that, they cannot survive without the smoking at regular intervals, but when they visit these public facilities where, they are not allowed to smoke, they have to resist their urge to smoke and this gives them a perspective that they can live without it. For instance, one of my paternal uncles was addicted to the cigarettes and when he went to the pilgrimage, there he was not allowed to smoke for 40 days, today he does not smoke at all, he left it and he is delighted that he has made it. Therefore, this law acts as the ray of hope and motivates them that, they can be free from the addiction.
To conclude, the implementation of the ban on smoking at public facilities is a step in the right direction, as it will not only safeguard the lungs of the surrounding audience, but will also encourage the smokers to quit such a bad habit.
While
some
people
believe that the complete ban on
smoking
at the
public
places
is justified
, others argue that it is not. This essay
totally
agrees
with the statement that, this law
is justified
as it saves
other
visitors of the
public
places from the passive
smoking
and
also
forces smokers to quit
smoking
for at least that period of time.
Firstly
, These
people
are not
only
causing harm to their
own
lungs,
but
are
also
harming others by passive
smoking
. In
other
words, it is
scientifically
proven that when a person stays in an area, where
smoking
is done
its
smoke
penetrates into the lungs of surrounding
people
via inhalation and
unknowingly
they are
also
affected
by the detrimental effects of
smoking
.
For example
, a study conducted at the
Stanford university
found that, the lungs of the friends of the chain smokers were 10 percent more damaged than that of the actual smokers.
As a result
, the Council has taken this decision,
so
that this will
keep
safe others who are not actually smoking.
Secondly
, it
Helps
smokers to quit
smoking
.
That is
to say, these
people
generally
have a notion that, they cannot survive without the
smoking
at regular intervals,
but
when they visit these
public
facilities where, they are not
allowed
to
smoke
, they
have to
resist their urge to
smoke
and this gives them a perspective that they can
live
without it.
For instance
, one of my paternal uncles
was addicted
to the cigarettes and when he went to the pilgrimage, there he was not
allowed
to
smoke
for 40 days,
today
he does not
smoke
at all, he
left
it and
he
is delighted
that he has made it.
Therefore
, this law acts as the ray of hope and motivates them that, they can be free from the addiction.
To conclude
, the implementation of the ban on
smoking
at
public
facilities is a step in the right direction, as it will not
only
safeguard the lungs of the surrounding audience,
but
will
also
encourage the smokers to quit such a
bad
habit.